North East Road recycling centre clears final hurdle after Tea Tree Gully Council legal battle

It divided a community, embroiled charities and sparked 24/7 protest but after months of legal action the fate of a controversial recycling centre has been decided.

It pitted ratepayer against ratepayer, embroiled charities, and saw a section of North East Road decorated as a 24/7 protest point, but an ugly legal battle to stop a recycling centre is finally over.

Facing a legal bill of more than $50,000, and having already paid at least $25,840 of ratepayer money in legal fees, Tea Tree Gully Council has ended its fight to stop servo-operator-turned-recycling-centre-attendant Emmanouel Pishas’s recycling facility.

The legal action by the council was a state first as it battled against not just Mr Pishas, but a State Commission Assessment Panel decision.

Embattled mayor Kevin Knight, who is in the midst of four motions of no confidence against him and calls to resign, posted an update to the challenge online following a council meeting this week.

“The Environment Resources and Development Court … has now made the order granting the planning consent, see (attachment one),” he wrote.

Mr Pishas told The Messenger he was happy to see the end of the court action.

“For the sake of the ratepayers I’m very happy that this has finally come to an end,” he said.

“As I always said from the beginning, the appeal by council was fruitless and the appeal by council where they spent tens of tens of tens of tens of thousands of ratepayer dollars was wrong.

“I thank the customers and supporters who urged us on to continue our fight.”

As the appeal had been resolved and the matter was no longer before the court several documents were released detailing the legal battle to try and stop Mr Pishas’s development application.

Emmanouel Pishas out the front of the recycling centre when he was protesting the council's legal action. Picture: File

A report from Norman Waterhouse Lawyers dated March 1 claimed the council was likely to win the battle.

“Our view at this point is that the council has the better case,” it said.

“And while there can be no guarantees in litigation, our view is that it is more likely than not that the council’s appeal will be successful.”

Then a ruling from the court ordered the council’s appeal be allowed, not to block the centre in its entirety, but to force minor changes to Mr Pishas’s original development application.

For all the troubles, and almost $26,000, the changes included additional signage, eight car parks, more drop off parking areas, the reorientation of swap over cages, landscaping, fencing, larger gates, line marking and ensuring forklifts used on site did not beep.

Those changes were agreed to while the legal proceedings were occurring and forced Norman Waterhouse to update their legal advice.

A council report by city development manager Nathan Grainger and community and cultural development director Carol Neil discussed the implications.

“Council may (now) have very low prospects of success,” they wrote.

“It is not too late for the council to (move away) from its position and seek to resolve the matter by way of an agreement on additional conditions.”

Councillor Jessica Lintvelt, whose ward the centre falls in, said she personally did not regret voting to appeal the original SCAP decision.

“The appeals process exists for a reason and I believe that council was doing its due diligence to investigate this further,” she said.

Ms Lintvelt said the decision to culminate the legal battle came after a ratepayer funded traffic study was presented to Mr Pishas allowing him to “improve outcomes” in his application.

In the early stage of the appeal process two Tea Tree Gully councillors, Deputy Mayor Lucas Jones and then councillor-now-state-Labor-MP Olivia Savvas held signs outside of the centre protesting its approval.

The councillors held a sign reading: “Say NO to the depot”.

Protesters, including former councillor and new Newland MP Olivia Savvas and Tea Tree Gully Council Deputy Mayor Lucas Jones, at the site in December. Picture: Jason Katsaras

Emmanouel Pishas confronts protesters. Picture: Jason Katsaras

Residents, some of who protested the recycling plant and have closely followed the saga, took to Facebook to have their opinions heard.

“The public interest lost. F***ing sad,” wrote William Gamur.

Not all residents were against the news, however.

“I’ll definitely be using it, nice and close to me and supporting a small business,” James Ferguson wrote.

The original application received 23 submissions from residents who were concerned with various elements of the facility.